Aftershock: Earthquake in New York

I first read Chuck Scarboroughs' novel "Aftershock" in 1996 or 97. Having grown up in NY as a child, I was familiar was Scarborough from his anchoring the local Eyewitness news for WNBC ch 4. I thoroughly enjoyed the novel, to the point that I reread it several times since. The piece of crap that aired on CBS bore no relation to the novel other than the fact that an earthquake struck the City of New York. Many subplots were missing, characters were added (i.e., the Russian cabbie [who the hell was he?]. I have wished that I could locate Chuck Scarboroughs' address and ask him how he could have greenlighted this garbage.

For those of you who enjoyed the 'disaster' movies of the 70's such as The Towering Inferno and The Poseidon Adventure, you'll love this movie. Although it's quite long (just under three hours), my attention never wavered. It had several sub-plots going on simultaneously, including a love story, the resolution of an old rivalry, and a parent's fight to absolve herself of guilt over a two-year accident. Yet the storyline was never blurred or confusing and the characters seemed real to me. Perhaps most importantly, not all the little sub-plots had fairy-tale endings; some ended happily and some did not, but you don't know which is which until it happens. All in all, this is a movie well worth seeing!

I'd avoided this movie for years. Unlike the writers, I understand the geology under NYC, so I was expecting it to be every bit as bad as "Volcano", based on a similarly silly premise. Finally, last night I needed some mindless entertainment to help me get to sleep so I tuned in.

Yes, the premise is just as silly as it sounds. However, the writers, while technically clueless, did craft one of the best disaster flick scripts I've ever seen. The acting is uniformly excellent, and the direction, after the typically slow disaster flick setup, was taut and effective. The special effects were quite decent for TV - certainly better than most SciFi channel made-for-TV films. Unlike "Volcano", the characters are sympathetic and believable. After the viewer has swallowed the basic premise, everything else goes down well. Altogether a very involving film, which is, after all, the goal of all disaster flicks.

Given a chance, I will watch it again (I missed the first 10 minutes or so). Heartily recommended for disaster flick fans, conditionally recommended for everyone else.

The disaster films of the 1990's excluding of course " Volcano" (1997 Tommy Lee Jones.) are just downright bad the special effects are horrible and the characters are pathetic. If you are going to make a disaster film you need to make them epic. If you are going to make a movie about an Eartthquake in new York then for god's sake show New York getting destroyed. The Earthquake sequence in this movie leaves you feeling jipped when it is all over with, and then it leaves you with pathetic characters that you don't care much about for the rest of the film. Another major problem with this film and most of the disaster films of the 90's is that there is absolutely no build up what so ever. If you watch the disaster films of the 1970's there was always a feeling for the first twenty minutes or so of those films that something really bad was going to happen, an impending doom that got you more involved in those films. That is certainly not the case nowadays and especially with " Earthquake In New York". If you want to see a good disaster film most definetly watch " The Towering Inferno" or " Earthquake" and if you are interested in a more updated disaster film catch " Volcano" with Tommy Lee Jones that movie truly delivers the goods.

OK. The genre "disaster film" genrally doesn't mean earth-shattering, brilliant writing. What these movies are all about is the ACTION-something that, i'm pleased to see, the other commenters on this page realize. This movie, i think, has some better writing than others. It sidesteps cliched characters to a certain extent...for example, the mayor is sympathetic and really NOT a mad power-monger. It was refreshing for me to see a person in a position of power in an action movie attempt not to abuse such power for his/her own interests. All the other characters are also appealing...except one. As for the direction, Mikael Salomon truly knows how to stage action...it's all about camera angles. In this film, he uses these to great effect...my personal favorite being the one he uses when 2 characters escape out from under a truck collapsing underground in the nick of time. all-in-all, this is an entertaining movie...and a worthy entry into the disaster-film genre. in fact, i like this better than VOLCANO, a theatrical release from a few years back. i give this movie 3 out of 4 stars.